It’s all right here.
Posts Tagged ‘gas’
KQED News was On The Scene for This Morning’s “Occupy Oakland” Police Eviction – Follow Along, Tick TockTuesday, October 25th, 2011
The i-MiEV’s are Here, the i-MiEV’s are Here! PG&E is Road-Testing Tiny Electric Cars from MitsubishiThursday, September 8th, 2011
Apparently, PG&E has been testing these Mitsubishi i-MiEV‘s (“Mitsubishi In-wheel motor Electric Vehicle” or “Mitsubishi innovative Electric Vehicle”) for a while, but this is my first time seeing one. PG&E fleet-tests all sorts of electric vehicles all the time, of course.
Isn’t that a wonderful contribution from a great local corporation? They’re a great company that gets it.
[What, what did I just say? What? Oh, why'd I say that? Mmmm. Now, is PG&E the outfit that lies about how they killed people or are they my number one booster?* Both, maybe? I'm conflicted. Note to self: Hire fashionable spokesmodel to clean up this mess. Get money from PG&E people to hire said spokesmodel. That's using the old bean! Bingo-bango.]
Now, where was I? Oh, the electric motors are in the wheels – this is the approach Mitsu is taking. So that’s a little more advanced than what other companies (like Tesla Motors and (heh) CODA Automotive) are doing. Is that a good idea? We’ll see.
Click to expand
Those stalk things are your manual mirror adjustment controls – old school!
All the deets:
“ALL-NEW, 100% ELECTRIC.
Welcome to a whole new era of fleet efficiency. The result of more than four decades of dedicated EV engineering, the 100% electric Mitsubishi i offers a host of advantages over traditional gas-powered fleet vehicles.
The Mitsubishi i has less moving parts than its gas-powered counterparts which can translate to reduced maintenance requirements and less downtime for repairs.
Volatile, rising fuel costs make it difficult to project expenses. Charging with electricity can stabilize that variability and help keep you in control of your budget.
With a low acquisition fee of under $30,000 and an operating cost of just $.03 per mile*, the Mitsubishi i is remarkably cost-effective.
Of course, the Mitsubishi i isn’t just about improving your bottom line. Featuring world-class performance, a targeted range of 85 miles,† comfortable seating for four and zero on-road emissions, this EV is equipped to handle a wide variety of tasks—and demonstrate your company’s commitment to the environment.
* Estimate based on 5.3 miles per kWh at .15 cents per kWh.
† Targeted LA4 EPA city cycle. Actual range will vary depending on driving / charging habits, speed, conditions, weather, temperature and battery age.”
You’ll be able to buy one for yourself next year. Maybe they’ll be calling it the Mitsubishi i by that point.
In other news, the big anti-PG&E protest will be tomorrow at noon
NO MORE SAN BRUNOS!
Rally Friday, Sept. 9 at Noon
1st Anniversary of the
CRIMINAL SAN BRUNO BLAST
for its Arrogance,
Public Power Now!
77 Beale Street, SF
Sponsored by Terry Joan Baum for Mayor 2011
See you there!
*Actually, I was in the Presidio one time, IRL, I’m srsly, and while I was there a PG&E employee came up and told me, twice, that “it would be in your interest” for me to pull my post about PG&E hiring people from Nevada to canvas for some proposition in the Mission. And then, when I was huffing up Arguello to get home later that evening, she offered me a ride in her car! I didn’t get in. (“Never get in the van.” – that’s the lesson I learned from Three Days of the Condor)
Joubert: It will happen this way. You may be walking. Maybe the first sunny day of the spring. And a car will slow beside you, and a door will open, and someone you know, maybe even trust, will get out of the car. And he will smile, a becoming smile…
Here’s How That Whole Fell and Divisadero ARCO Station Bike Lane Situation Worked Out, On a Busy DayTuesday, September 6th, 2011
Pretty much. The basic idea was to take out a few parking spaces. Getting that done in touchy, touchy San Francisco took about a half-decade
So, it used to be all like this:
Click to expand
And now it’s all like this, on a busy day:
For whatever reason, probably something to do with gasoline prices, this station doesn’t seem to get long lines on Fell as much as before.
Anyway, case closed for now…
And this was like ten minutes later – it was another dude (macho*, perhaps?) entirely.
Why not add a kit to your bike, you know, to stick it to the man? No licensing, registration, or pesky emissions regulations to worry about, right?
And please remember, Loud Pipes Save Lives, or something.
*Is it his scarf or his ladybug helmet what makes him so macho? Is he loved, does he have a family?
Peak Oil Update: The ConocoPhillips 76 Station at 1st and Harrison Plans on Selling Gasoline Until 2050 at LeastFriday, July 22nd, 2011
(I vividly remember the first time I spent $20 on a tank of gas – it was with an Audi 5000 in Honolulu, way back in the 90′s. But I only vaguely recall my first $100 tankful – it was with Mom’s Taxi in Napa someplace a few years back. [GRANDPA SIMPSON MODE=OFF])
So there I was putting $94 worth of 87 octane (NBP – Never Buy Premium*) into Mom’s Taxi (straight outta Toyota City) and here’s what I saw:
Click to expand
Are we going to even have gas stations in 2050 and beyond? I don’t know, probably.
But the Peak Oil crowd will not like seeing this.
Not at all.
*Oh, your car “needs” premium? No it doesn’t.**
**Oh, you have an Audi? Well, you only think it needs premium. It doesn’t, IRL. Actually, you and your ride, IRL, you’re not that special.***
***Oh, you have a 1968 Porsche 912 what pings on regular? BINGO! You, sir or ma’am, you need premium. But nobody else.
Dennis Herrera Throws Down: Acts to Sue CPUC and Feds Over Failure to Enforce Gas Pipeline Safety StandardsThursday, July 14th, 2011
City Attorney Dennis Herrera is all over last year’s gas transmission explosion in San Bruno.
All the deets.
Revelations from San Bruno tragedy lead San Francisco to seek federal court order compelling regulators to strictly enforce U.S. safety standards
SAN FRANCISCO (July 14, 2011) — City Attorney Dennis Herrera has taken the first step toward suing the California Public Utilities Commission and federal regulators for their failure to reasonably enforce federal gas pipeline safety standards as required by the Pipeline Safety Act. The notice of intent to sue Herrera delivered late today is a legally-required precursor to civil litigation by San Francisco, which will seek a federal court order to compel the CPUC and the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration to enforce federal pipeline safety standards in an effective manner.
Herrera’s move comes in the wake of increasingly troubling revelations in news accounts and last month’s sharply critical report by an independent review panel investigating the deadly explosion of a PG&E gas transmission line in San Bruno, Calif. on Sept. 9, 2010, which resulted in the loss of eight lives and the destruction of 38 homes. That investigation report concluded that CPUC’s “culture serves as an impediment to effective regulation,” and went on to fault regulators who “did not have the resources to monitor PG&E’s performance in pipeline integrity management adequately or the organizational focus that would have elevated concerns about PG&E’s performance in a meaningful way.” The City Attorney’s Office will file its comments on that investigation report with the CPUC tomorrow.
Continued after the jump
Hey, SFMTA! Do you realize that you’re a national joke?
‘Cause, I don’t know, sometimes it seems you don’t realize you’re a national joke.
OK, work with me here, you’re beautiful, you’re gorgeous, you’re a San Francisco Giants* fan, right, and you don’t care what it costs to park near AT&T Park, oh no, what has you fazed is the cost of the four quid worth of petrol you had to expend to get to the game, so look astonished, go ahead, oh hey Margie, could you stencil the word “gasoline” onto our 1960′s-style gas pump, oh never mind, we’ll just add it in later in post, OK, babe, you’re giving me a 3 right now, let’s make it a 9, that’s it, look more astonished, more, that’s it, hold it, hold it. Click! That’s a rap people, I’ll see you at the after party:
Click to expand
How much did we pay for this ad, I wonder…
*Or something, I still haven’t figured out which baseball team the talent supports. Does the M stand for MUNI? Oh, what’s that? The SF Giants might not want to be associated with a hated, loser organization like MUNI? Maybe…
You, people love to complain about the low-cost ARCO right next door, but this Shell station at the corner of Divisadero and Oak in the EaPA doesn’t get criticized one bit.
Don’t know why.
Anyway, here they are, all those solar panels, facing more west than south, IMO:
Click to expand
Get all the deets right here, about the Kyocera photovoltaic panels and Sunny Boy inverters and whatnot.
Click to expand
The whole process took a few years…
Anyway, there’s your update.
CEOs Profiting from AB 32 Cap and Trade Law Want Governor Jerry Brown to Implement AB 32 As Is, Or SomethingWednesday, June 1st, 2011
The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, aka AB 32, is in trouble, or something, per the California Business Alliance for a Green Economy. Seems that California courts might be slowing down/delaying implementation.
Get all the deets of their recent letter to Jerry Brown, below.
How Soon Is Now for AB32?
Here’s the letter:
“May 31, 2011
The Honorable Jerry Brown
Governor of California
State Capitol, Suite 1173
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: AB 32/cap and trade rule
Dear Governor Brown:
We, the undersigned California CEOs and business leaders, are dedicated to the successful implementation of the
state’s landmark law, AB 32. Like you, we believe AB 32 is benefiting our economy and environment and is crucial
to attracting additional clean technology investment to the state.
While Californians overwhelmingly rejected Proposition 23 last year and its attempt to indefinitely delay
implementation of AB 32, key provisions of the law are now facing additional challenges that also threaten to delay
implementation even further. While the cap and trade program is one of many AB 32 rules, we believe it is critical
to the success of the overall program.
First, we reject the calls from some environmental organizations for a wholesale revision of the AB 32 cap and
trade system. We take particular issue with these organizations calling for such revisions in the name of jobs and
the economy. As business leaders who are responsible for creating the jobs that have become such a popular
talking point, we can tell you that nothing will do more harm to the emerging California clean economy sector than
continued regulatory uncertainty. By far, the biggest impediment to creating real jobs is delay. The implementation
of AB 32 has proven to be a bright spot during this recession. It has attracted clean technology manufacturers,
investors, businesses and jobs to the state. Undermining this market signal with indefinite delays will jeopardize
Second, a recent court decision based on a lawsuit filed by several organizations has effectively halted the cap and
trade rule development. As a result of this lawsuit, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) is unable to do any
work related to the rulemaking. If the delay persists, we are increasingly concerned that the state will fail to meet
its deadline for the rule to go into effect in 2012. Further, we believe efforts to derail California’s cap and trade
rule will jeopardize the Western Climate Initiative (WCI) as California’s participation is crucial to the success of the
WCI. A strong regional carbon market anchored by California is important to the business sector and it will increase
the size of the market for California’s clean technology industry.
For businesses, uncertainty in the marketplace hurts investment, innovation and growth. Forcing businesses to
remain in virtual regulatory limbo will only exacerbate the problem. In order to give businesses the confidence that
California will lead the nation with the creation of a robust, economy-wide cap and trade system, it is vital the
state resolves this issue as soon as possible. We look forward to working with you and your Administration on the
implementation of AB 32 and strengthening California’s clean economy.
Signers after the jump.